{"id":"tas:sr-2020-017","name":"Strategic Infrastructure Corridors (Strategic and Recreational Use) (Transfer of Railway Infrastructure - Turners Marsh to Lilydale) Notice 2020","slug":"strategic-infrastructure-corridors-strategic-and-recreational-use-transfer-of-railway-infrastructure","collection":"regulation","jurisdiction":"tas","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":"17 of 2020","makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":182590,"registerId":"tas-tas:sr-2020-017-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-05","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Short title","content":"### 1 Short title\n\n> This notice may be cited as the [Strategic Infrastructure Corridors (Strategic and Recreational Use) (Transfer of Railway Infrastructure - Turners Marsh to Lilydale) Notice 2020](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/sr-2020-017) .","sortOrder":0},{"sectionNumber":"2","sectionType":"section","heading":"Commencement","content":"### 2 Commencement\n\n> This notice takes effect on 27 March 2020.","sortOrder":1},{"sectionNumber":"3","sectionType":"section","heading":"Transfer of rail infrastructure","content":"### 3 Transfer of rail infrastructure\n\n> All rail infrastructure that is situated on the corridor named the North East Corridor from Turners Marsh to Lilydale is transferred to the Crown.\n\nDisplayed and numbered in accordance with the *[Rules Publication Act 1953](/view/html/inforce/current/act-1953-050)*.\n\nNotified in the *Gazette* on 18 March 2020\n\nThis notice is administered in the Department of State Growth.","sortOrder":2}],"analysis":{"summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The notice appears to operate precisely within the scope of its enabling legislation — transferring a specific piece of former railway infrastructure for strategic and recreational use. There is no evidence of scope creep or unintended expansion beyond the corridor identified."},"complexity_factors":["Very narrow and specific subject matter — a single defined corridor between two named locations","Operates under an enabling Act (Strategic Infrastructure Corridors Act) which carries the real legal complexity, not this notice itself","Notice-style instrument with limited substantive content visible in the provided text","No apparent cross-jurisdictional elements or competing legal regimes","Minimal ambiguity in purpose or effect"],"plain_english_summary":"## What This Law Does\n\nThis is a Tasmanian government notice that **transfers ownership or management of old railway infrastructure** — specifically the railway corridor running from **Turners Marsh to Lilydale** in northern Tasmania — to allow it to be used for **strategic and recreational purposes**.\n\n## Who It Affects\n\n- **Local residents and visitors** near the Turners Marsh–Lilydale corridor, who may gain access to the land for recreational activities (such as walking or cycling trails)\n- **Government agencies** responsible for managing the transferred infrastructure\n- **Landowners** adjacent to the former rail corridor\n\n## Why It Matters\n\nOld, unused railway lines in Tasmania are being repurposed under the *Strategic Infrastructure Corridors (Strategic and Recreational Use) Act*. Rather than letting the land sit idle or selling it off, the government is formally transferring it so it can serve a public benefit — likely as part of a **rail trail or shared-use path**. This kind of transfer also protects the corridor from being broken up or developed in ways that would prevent future public access.\n\n## Key Point\n\nThis is largely an **administrative housekeeping measure** — it legally formalises who controls the land and what it can be used for. The practical effect is that the former rail corridor becomes available for community use under a structured legal framework."},"issue_detection":{"absurdities":[{"type":"other","section":"Status Information / Currency of version","severity":"low","reasoning":"This is a metadata artefact rather than a substantive drafting flaw — the access timestamp is dynamically generated. However, if treated as part of the instrument's text, it purports to describe currency up to a specific future moment (5 April 2026 16:21) while simultaneously claiming to be current 'to date' (i.e., open-ended). These are logically inconsistent: either the currency is open-ended or it terminates at the access timestamp.","confidence":0.45,"description":"The legislation states it was 'accessed 5 April 2026 at 16:21' but the file was last modified on 18 March 2020 and is described as current from 27 March 2020 'to date'. The access date of 5 April 2026 embedded in the version currency statement is a prospective future date relative to the document's own authorship, creating a temporal paradox where the currency statement references a date the instrument could not have anticipated."},{"type":"retroactive_impossibility","section":"Status Information - Authorisation","severity":"low","reasoning":"While administratively explicable (instruments are prepared before gazettal), the published instrument on its face records a modification date that precedes its operative date. If the file modification date is taken as representing the final authorised version, any amendments or corrections made between 18 March and 27 March 2020 would not be reflected, raising questions about whether the published text is the legally operative text.","confidence":0.5,"description":"The instrument was gazetted and came into force on 27 March 2020, but the file is stated to have been last modified on 18 March 2020 — nine days before the instrument's own commencement date. This means the authoritative published file predates the instrument's legal existence."},{"type":"impossible_compliance","section":"Title / Scope","severity":"medium","reasoning":"Without substantive provisions in the available text governing how 'strategic' and 'recreational' uses are to coexist, parties seeking to comply with the instrument cannot determine which use prevails in the event of conflict. The enabling Act (Strategic Infrastructure Corridors Act 2016 (Tas)) anticipates this tension but the instrument itself provides no resolution mechanism based on the text provided.","confidence":0.55,"description":"The instrument title references both 'Strategic and Recreational Use' as dual purposes for transferred railway infrastructure, but the operative text provided contains no substantive provisions distinguishing, prioritising, or reconciling these two potentially incompatible uses. Strategic corridor use (e.g., future rail, utilities) and recreational use (e.g., walking trails) can be physically and legally incompatible on the same corridor simultaneously."}],"contradictions":[{"severity":"low","section_a":"Currency of version: 'current from 27 March 2020 to date'","section_b":"Authorisation: 'File last modified 18 March 2020'","confidence":0.6,"description":"The instrument claims to be current from 27 March 2020 (its commencement/gazettal date), yet the underlying file was last modified on 18 March 2020 — nine days earlier. The 'current from' date and the 'last modified' date are irreconcilable if the last modified date is understood to represent the final authoritative state of the instrument, since the instrument did not legally exist until 27 March 2020."},{"severity":"low","section_a":"Status Information: 'Legislation on this site is usually updated within 3 working days after a change to the legislation'","section_b":"Table of Amending Instruments: reference to amendments existing","confidence":0.4,"description":"The status block acknowledges that amendments exist (by providing a link to a Table of Amendments) while simultaneously presenting the instrument as reflecting the current consolidated version. If amendments have been made but the consolidation update cycle of '3 working days' has not yet elapsed, the published text may not reflect the current law at the moment of access — directly contradicting the 'current from 27 March 2020 to date' currency claim."}]},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":1,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This notice performs exactly one function as described in its title: transferring specific railway infrastructure to the Crown. There is no evidence of scope creep — it is precisely targeted at the Turners Marsh to Lilydale section and does not expand beyond this."},"complexity_factors":["Only 3 operative sections total","Zero defined terms","No cross-references to other legislation (except citation of the Rules Publication Act in the footer)","Single, unconditional transfer with no exceptions or conditions","Extremely narrow geographic scope (one specific corridor between two named locations)","No procedural requirements, timelines, or compliance obligations"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this does:**\nThis notice transfers ownership of railway infrastructure (tracks, signals, bridges, etc.) from whoever currently owns it to the Crown (the Tasmanian Government). Specifically, it covers the rail line running from Turners Marsh to Lilydale along what's called the \"North East Corridor.\"\n\n**Who it affects:**\n- The Tasmanian Government, which takes ownership of this rail infrastructure\n- Any previous owner of this specific railway section (likely a rail operator or infrastructure company)\n- Potentially local communities and recreational users, since the corridor is designated for both \"strategic\" (transport/planning) and \"recreational\" use\n\n**Why it matters:**\nThis is a housekeeping step that consolidates government control over a specific stretch of railway. By transferring the infrastructure to the Crown, the government can better manage the corridor for future transport needs or recreational purposes (like rail trails). It removes private or fragmented ownership that might complicate planning decisions.\n\n**Key point:** This is a very specific, technical transfer affecting only one rail corridor in northern Tasmania — roughly 10-15 kilometres of track between two small towns."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/strategic-infrastructure-corridors-strategic-and-recreational-use-transfer-of-railway-infrastructure","history":"/api/acts/strategic-infrastructure-corridors-strategic-and-recreational-use-transfer-of-railway-infrastructure/history","analysis":"/api/acts/strategic-infrastructure-corridors-strategic-and-recreational-use-transfer-of-railway-infrastructure/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/strategic-infrastructure-corridors-strategic-and-recreational-use-transfer-of-railway-infrastructure/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/strategic-infrastructure-corridors-strategic-and-recreational-use-transfer-of-railway-infrastructure/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/strategic-infrastructure-corridors-strategic-and-recreational-use-transfer-of-railway-infrastructure/documents"}}